[prairiebreeze]

Am I the only one who longs for those days when political opponents would refer to each other as "my worthy opponent" "my learned and esteemed colleague and opponent" or at least in a civil manner?

Mud, Mud, Mud. Get's tiresome.

[Rurudyne]

That would assume that an opponent is actually worthy, or else there is enough doubt that even the presumption of worthiness is justified.

For comparison, years ago President Clinton made a obscure statement about why he would not return campaign donations made may by known pornographers, essentially saying that returning the money would increase the influence of other monies given.

When the original statement was properly parsed it made no sense UNLESS you realized that if money offered to a Democrat were refused then comparable monies offered to Republicans may have more influence in comparison to what they have when Democrats accept porn-bucks.

Thus the imperative to defeat Republicans outweighs all other considerations about accepting donations from otherwise questionable sources.

If you think about it, that "imperative" well preconditions much of the behavior of the DNC these days.

[Hilltop]

Alas, your worthy wish of civil discourse was not part and parcel of the Lincoln v Douglas debate.

Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

The "democrats" will do anything to regain power.

This is not politics, it's war.

More's the pity, as I fear for the Republic.